[1.7.10] [1.12.2] Issues with Proxies

[zizbird]

Good evening.

 

Hopefully it's alright to paste a link to the original topic, since it has the painstaking identification of the context of the problem I'm addressing, which I can't really reproduce.

Oh, okay, there's that question, so... I didn't think it was "enough" to warrant a whole new topic... and the thread is old but the problem isn't... and the previous answers never did fully solve the problem... and it seems redundant to reiterate an existing conversation and problem... and all the future searchers who will be looking there but not here will be left hanging after getting their hopes up because they finally found something that they're reasonably sure matches the problem they're having  then our ears will start ringing because they'll be cursing our names for not having the courage to just answer the dang question, for fear of getting a slap on the wrist by petty authority. Yeah, that was me, cursing your names. Sorry. So I solved it on my own and brought the solution back to share, posting it right where the pain point was when I was in those shoes. That's why.

 

Anyway, here it is...

 

Someone asked about Eclipse not understanding @SidedProxy annotation while modding for Minecraft 1.7.10, and I was recently using 1.8.x and 1.12.2 (which is the most recent at time of posting) and I observed the same trouble.

Error message I observed was "SidedProxy cannot be resolved to a type".

 

Eventually I fixed it by adding this line to my Main:

import net.minecraftforge.fml.common.SidedProxy;

 

This is in the file "Main.java" or whatever you called your mod's main class.
That's the file people sometimes refer to as containing "@Mod".

 

Can you tell? This is going to seem sooo easy later on once we've got proxies running smoothly.  

 

I got the mod built and operating as expected on my Forge server, even if mostly vacuously, so I'm somewhat confident this is an acceptable solution.

 

HTH. 

-ziz

[zizbird]

Have you noticed that your forum is mostly populated by people who lack sufficient Java knowledge to make a mod? 

 

Peace.

-ziz

 

p.s. Draco18s's post below makes it clear not to post without sufficient Java knowledge. Never mind then. Carry on.

Edited January 22, 2018 by zizbird
Pointless extra words deleted.

[Draco18s]

 

Quote

 

Modder Support

This is the support section for those modding with Forge. Help with modding goes in here, however, please keep in mind that this is not a Java school. You are expected to have basic knowledge of Java before posting here.

 

 

[zizbird]

I think the spirit of that quote means "You are expected to have basic knowledge of Java before posting here to ask for help"

Do you really think it also means "You are expected to have basic knowledge of Java before posting here to help someone"?

 

If so, sorry to bother you (both), but man, you've got an epidemic of people like me.

 

-ziz

[Draco18s]

Making a thread going "HEY GUYS, IMPORTS ARE A THING!" helps no one, because the only people who should need that help fail the "You are expected to have basic knowledge of Java before posting here to ask for help" part of the equation.

[zizbird]

I agree, Draco18s.

"HEY GUYS, IMPORTS ARE A THING!" could be helpful as a comment on a specific topic, but as it's own topic, it's lame. Better suited to a comment or a tutorial.

But a Forum Team member asked me to make it into a new topic, so there it is.

Edited January 22, 2018 by zizbird

[Draco18s]

You bumped a two year old thread, that's why.

If you HAVE a problem, start a new thread, is what D7 actually said.

[jabelar]

I think it is actually helpful to tell people "go away, that's a basic Java issue". The reason is that ideally we teach people to help themselves, and so that means people should (a) learn to realize that their question has nothing to do with Minecraft and is generic to Java or their IDE, and (b) learn to realize that there are amazing resources (better than here) for learning Java.

 

So for this sort of problem I'd love people to go -- my IDE is complaining so I will google "cannot be resolved to a type" and get great answers like https://stackoverflow.com/questions/15794821/eclipse-error-cannot-be-resolved-to-a-type

 

So it is actually more helpful to tell people to go somewhere else for such problems. They'll become stronger programmers. 

Edited January 22, 2018 by jabelar

[Draco18s]

4 minutes ago, jabelar said:

The reason is that ideally we teach people to help themselves

Yeah, which is why some of my recent posts are like this one:

 

[zizbird]

Draco18s, I'm not a mind-reader.

 

"If you HAVE a problem, start a new thread" isn't what he said.

I can figure now that could very well be what he meant, but I wouldn't have known that at the time, because as I'll try to explain later, I had the wrong idea about this whole forum.

 

What he actually said was...

Quote

Create your own topic.

 

It's a simple, straightforward command.

 

So I did.

 

Is that autistic? Yeah, maybe so. But I'd be in good company. And it's probably part of what makes me good at programming. (heh, not in Java yet obviously)

 

Well said, jabelar. (about that it's probably more helpful to tell people "go away, that's a basic Java issue". Well, maybe you wouldn't say it exactly like that, but yeah.)

That helps bring into focus for me the part I played in what went wrong here. Thank you.

 

No one told the user ravingmadlunatic that though (and he's not nearly the least knowledgeable who wasn't told that, so I imagine that's why he thought he could ask) and that's a big part of the reason why I thought his question was worthy of an answer. That mistaken sense of worthiness in its turn was a big part of why I evaluated it as acceptable to comment on an old thread (for people in the same boat).

 

Yeah, on the contrary, a forum team member and senior users were being very nice and helpful to that user despite him clearly not meeting the stated criteria of basic Java knowledge (such as how imports work).

 

Maybe those criteria weren't apparent at the time? I don't know. But the take-home message for me was, being nice to people of any skill level and helping them was the cultural norm here, and I should interpret the written rules in that light. I don't mean to say that misconception is entirely your faults, any or all of you -- after all, that's my basic assumption in general in life so I'm prone to jumping to that conclusion. Collectively, you've all surely done more than enough to correct those perceptions for me, so rest assured.

 

Well, I'm glad to have gotten to the bottom of it.

 

Looks like ravingmadlunatic finally got the message too. I'll take that "go away" as marching orders myself now, since obviously I don't have enough basic Java knowledge either.

 

Maybe he'll be back when he does. Maybe I will will too. Talk with you all then.

 

Even though it maybe didn't work out very well for anybody, nonetheless I appreciate you trying. Keep at it.

 

Peace.

-ziz

[Draco18s]

39 minutes ago, zizbird said:

Draco18s, I'm not a mind-reader.

 

"If you HAVE a problem, start a new thread" isn't what he said.

I can figure now that could very well be what he meant, but I wouldn't have known that at the time, because as I'll try to explain later, I had the wrong idea about this whole forum.

 

Lets see...

Quote

On 1/20/2018 at 7:54 PM, zizbird said:

but I was just now having the same problem starting out modding for Minecraft 1.12.2

Create your own topic.

Don't reply to old topics because "you are having the same problem." Instead, create a new topic.

[jabelar]

1 hour ago, zizbird said:

Yeah, on the contrary, a forum team member and senior users were being very nice and helpful to that user despite him clearly not meeting the stated criteria of basic Java knowledge (such as how imports work).

 

Maybe those criteria weren't apparent at the time? I don't know.

 

I think we're getting more strict to "police" things now. It frankly gets wearing answering questions that a quick google could have answered.

 

I personally don't get the aversion to picking up old threads if they were not properly concluded though. I feel like that helps the people that might get that thread in a search.

 

The tricky thing on the internet is simply not knowing who is on the other end. For all we know it can be a kid, or someone with a mental disability, or maybe somebody who needs a cheery outlet for an otherwise depressing life. So I like to err on the side of kindness.

 

However, like a coach I also like to give some "tough love" to someone who I think is capable of getting to the next level. So if someone is hopeless, I'm usually kind cause I figure they may have some problems. If someone is posting some credible code but asking a lazy question I usually will push them to learn to help themselves. So apparent inconsistencies in responses may actually have a basis. 

 

Anyway, your desire to help is welcome here. Please don't be put off by this situation.

Edited January 23, 2018 by jabelar

[Draco18s]

29 minutes ago, jabelar said:

I personally don't get the aversion to picking up old threads if they were not properly concluded though. I feel like that helps the people that might get that thread in a search.

A thread from two years ago will never be worth replying to. If the original poster is even still around and if the version of Forge/MC being used is still supported, then maybe it's still relevant.

 

But it's likely not.

[jabelar]

29 minutes ago, Draco18s said:

A thread from two years ago will never be worth replying to. If the original poster is even still around and if the version of Forge/MC being used is still supported, then maybe it's still relevant.

 

But it's likely not.

I wouldn't say never. However, I agree that in many / most cases it isn't appropriate. If you have a targeted answer to the question I think it can be appropriate. The problem with most people replying to old threads is that they aren't trying to give a conclusion to the thread, most people are saying something like "I have same problem" which is entirely unhelpful, and another set of people are adding an answer which isn't really properly addressing the problem in the first place.

 

Maybe it is just me though, but seeing an old question that was never properly answered does bother me. The internet is becoming a place where information is accessible indefinitely and so even if something was posted five years ago, it can be very likely to come up in a Google search today.

 

I would actually like it to work the other way -- an old thread should have the actual answer and any new questions on the same topic should be referred back to the old thread. This is sort of how StackOverflow works -- many new questions are closed as "duplicates" although admittedly even that gets debated sometimes depending on how close the question really is. In other words, in some help systems the first time the question is asked is considered the place where the definitive answer should be.

 

In any case, people here definitely dislike necro posting and I agree that in most cases people resurrecting old posts are doing so wrongly so worth sticking to the rule.

 

[zizbird]

17 hours ago, Draco18s said:

Lets see...

Don't reply to old topics because "you are having the same problem." Instead, create a new topic.

 

I've been sewing a lot of effort into being clear, but I don't seem to be reaping that harvest.

It's difficult for me to understand how you (or him, or anyone) could think I was replying to an old topic because I was having the same problem...

• I did not reply because I was having the same problem.
• I am not having the same problem.
• At the time of my initial post I was not having the same problem.
• At the time of my initial post, my problems were all in the past.
• What I had was a solution, not a problem, so I can't have been replying... "to old topics because 'you are having the same problem'."

It's just not possible.

Well, I don't think I can be any clearer, so maybe it's time we moved on to greener pastures.

 

 

17 hours ago, Draco18s said:

A thread from two years ago will never be worth replying to.

 

Your experiences and mine must differ widely.

 

My thoughts on necro dogma, if anyone cares...

Spoiler

Well since I'm persona non grata having already stepped in it, I might as well speak my mind for the benefit of those who feel the same as me but are understandably intimidated, and anyone who wants to know what we're thinking...

 

I think anti-necro dogma is at best, mostly nonsense, and at worst, sick-minded and self-defeating.

A lot of older threads stay perfectly relevant year on year.

I never did see the point of opening hundreds, eventually thousands, of redundant threads instead of referencing the old one and updating it freely when needed.

 

If organizational purposes are the reasoning, then auto-lock.

But auto-lock based on age of views, not age of replies, because it's the views that hemorrhage duplicate questions your way.

 

The older a thread gets, the less worthwhile replying to it usually becomes, yes, mostly because it's been settled and anything additional is reiteration or chatting.

But "not worthwhile" and "must be prevented" are far different things.

If chronological age is supposed to prove relevance, then why not let relevance just speak for itself?

 

If it's irrelevant, why try (ineffectually) to suppress it when it could be provided a forum section instead?

Seems to me that would take a lot of pressure off you and provide a much more welcoming overall environment.

Then instead of the basic message being "your learning style is wrong. hit the bricks." it would be more like "your comfy spot's right over there."

 

If a thread is truly not relevant, it will usually go out of use organically (other than the occasional stray nonsense comment which is unpreventable regardless) unless the surrounding structures prevent it from organically going out of use (such as the practice of attempting never to update it --> self-fulfilling prophesy).

 

At worst, the righteous indignation against taboo-breaking allowed by the anti-necro dogma is addictive. It's a religion with adherents and heathen scum who can be spoken to harshly.

I find that dogma and the negativity in implementation most prevalent in those forums which offer the most indicators of user "rank", i.e., roles, titles, numeric stats displayed prominently.

 

This forum is a good example of a very rank-heavy environment, so really, it should be no surprise that dogma would be prevalent here.

 

(Ugh, I had noticed that, but alas, I was thrown off the scent at just the wrong moment.)

 

The whole construct, at worst is a self-perpetuating, sisyphean firefight, always putting out fires, but never preventing them.

Reactivity versus proactivity.

 

Well, that's my two-cents. It's your forum, so you'll run it however you want. If those concepts don't hold water for you, hopefully that at least shed some light on my thinking and that of others who annoy you, so maybe it'll be of some help in dealing with us.

 

17 hours ago, jabelar said:

The tricky thing on the internet is simply not knowing who is on the other end. For all we know it can be a kid, or someone with a mental disability, or maybe somebody who needs a cheery outlet for an otherwise depressing life. So I like to err on the side of kindness.

 

Thank you so much for that.

Never think your kindness isn't appreciated. Even if we're generally the least able to thank you.

 

When I have more knowledgeable answers to contribute, maybe those will therefore be less controversial answers.

Maybe I'll see you then.

 

Take care.

-ziz